You are assuming that is what happened, albeit a reasonable assumption to make it is still just that an “assumption” as to what happened. I suspect that lorry drivers may be assuming a different scenario & until such time as proven otherwise I will continue to feel for all those involved. 🙁

where cars are concerned it is nothing new.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto#Fuel_tank_defect

As a motorist and a cyclist I see terrible standards from drivers and cyclists alike. The fact is cars drive into toher cars and lorrys crash into other lorries every day so the argument that people should keep their eyes peeled and just avoid accidents is nonsense. Accidents happen every day and cyclists are so much more at risk. Roads are dangerous places and I just wish we’d ban cyclists from dual carridgeways and busy A-roads and build dedicated cycle lanes – proper lnes, not just white lines painted at the side of the road where all the potholes are and all the road debris ends up causing punctures. Not all cases of RTA’s involving cyclists are the motorists fault an some cyclists do put them selves in situations where they are exposing themselves to heightened ris. Not saying its their fault, they deserve it or it should be treated any different, but from a personal survival point of view its a reality to deal with. I don’t ride my bike on dual carridgeways because of this – I don’t like putting my life in the hands of a total stranger. All you can do in life is to look out for yourselfe, try to minimise risks and hope for the best. But accidents do happen, and sometimes accidents are no-body’s ‘fault’, they’re not as a result of anyones neglegence, they’re accidents. The concept that everyone should pay is invented by laywers to exploit more cash out of people.

the word ‘accident’ is used far too flippantly,thereby already excusing parties involved of responsibility, the word should always be Incident– and until it can be proven one way or another remain as such. Accidents are by their name –unpreventable–they are rare– itsa misnomer to use the word in most cases!

as for the right to ride on the road, we are all road users, whether in a vehicle,cycle, horse or on foot–the issue of awareness is much needed–concentration is needed when driving, so why have in car visual systems,i have seen drivers watching movies on laptops , a guy i worked with used to watch porn on his way to work whilst driving at high speed on narrow roads– and boast about it !! these are the things we are up against–the trivialising of driving,the infantile attitude of some people , and a very hands off enforcement of bad/careless driving.

good points made above…btw…by mrmo

It still astonishes me that it’s considered acceptable to own an expensive piece of complicated machinery with ONE test to use it and NO requirement to ever do another test or to take it to a garage more than once a year (for an MOT).

Imagine that with any other form of public transport or even something basic like a forklift truck! Imagine getting on a plane and the pilot saying “yep, passed my test on a Cessna 30 years ago, never needed another test – oh and the plane was last serviced 9 months ago, it was fine then except the garage said one of the bolts holding the wings on was a bit rusty and might need to be looked at next time”.

😯

If only someone had the political balls to stand up and introduce mandatory retests every 5 years, full safety checks every 6 months and a proper judicial system that treated driving offences as a serious crime rather than a case of “oh, an accident, how terrible, give me £60, have 3 points, try not to kill anyone again”.

It’s a bl**dy excellent assumption to make. Lorry drivers on their forums might be assuming something different, but it’s highly likely they’re wrong. Care to suggest an alternative scenario for running into a couple of cyclists on a straight level road with excellent visibility?

The vast majority are. The few which are caused by cyclists are generally caused by them being total idiots, riding in a way which I never do (and I presume most on here never do either). Hence all RTAs involving sensible cyclists are the motorists fault. You might argue that sensible drivers don’t cause RTAs either, but in that case there are very few sensible drivers (I won’t even include myself in that bracket).

I’m not sure there have been many pitchforks on display – just that some have suggested sympathy with the driver, something I’m not prepared to give until it’s shown that the most likely scenario is incorrect. I don’t think that’s a particularly unreasonable position to take.

I’d be surprised if the proportion caused by cyclists wasn’t disproportionately high in London.

@aracer

er the cyclists???

….

@racer, yes just trying to put it as too many seem to think.

As for who is at fault in the example of the lorry and following car…
Both guilty of something, quite what not so sure.

There is a third (and i think only realistic) option, and its Autonomous Driving. Everyones working on it.

Most of the advantages can be gained without full autonomy via “driver assist” systems. Cars and lorries will detect accidents before they happen and take avoiding action if the motorist doesn’t do anything. This already exists for pedestrian detection and its being written into euro NCAP rules.

The word “assist” has been chosen carefully, because (at the moment) the driver still ultimately remains responsible for any collision. A lot of real world testing is done too, to ensure risk compensation doesn’t remove any benefits.

@ aracer

I don’t know the full details of the accident, I was just using it as an example of the additional dangers of cycling on DC’s & yes more than likely was a combination of the car & lorry drivers poor driving as illustrated above.

Re your comments about sensible cyclists, I’d like to class myself as one of those but just like every other human alive I am still prone to the odd error even when cycling.

One thing I do know for sure is that friends & relatives will want to know what really happened, rather than assumptions being made, to cause the death of their nearest & dearest. Whether they get closure or whether the lorry driver gives full & frank evidence, we have yet to see – again why I for one would like to see the rolling out of in cab/car cameras to get a better evidence in these tragic circumstances.

The Cyclists

It’s mind boggling that this road was approved for bicycle use.

Are you drunk?

Yes, it was a tragic event and it was not my intention to disrespect anyone involved. How you got that impression though is beyond me.

roads don’t have to be ‘approved’ for bicycle use, by default they are all legal for bicycle use unless specifically exempted (ie: TRO or Mway).

lets not forget the roads were there before the cars.

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again, banning cyclists/horses/walkers whatever from roads does not make them safer.

You should look at this from the other angle, if a road is dangerous then you need to remove the cause of the danger, not the people in danger.

Motorways?

Aracer – you are trolling on partial 3rd hand information about a hypothetical case, where you don’t even know if it was police, cps or court that made the decision.

nice of on the one not-really-relevant bit of my comment 😉

Bicycles have never been allowed on motorways (as far as I know?), their entire purpose is at odds with travelling bike bike/horse/on foot, they were built specifically for moving cars at high speed, most other roads pre-date cars and I was referring to removing bikes from roads that they are already allowed on that have been developed over time.

However, despite that my point still stands, banning them doesn’t make them safer. It might reduce the number of deaths but only by reducing the number of users and that is not the same thing.

Treat the cause not the symptom.

Some roads are dangerous for vulnerable road users, the solution is to make them safer*, not remove the users, and its that fundamental point that people far and wide seem to be missing.

*primarily by the way we use them, not necessarily by material redesign.

the below sums up the above quite nicely i think.

http://www.iam.org.uk/media-and-research/media-centre/news-archive/20240-male-drivers-fail-to-see-the-point